The geostrategic power struggle between China and the United States in Iran

BeijingChina is a stabilizing and peaceful force against the United States, which sows chaos throughout the world… Or at least this is the message Beijing is conveying in response to the attack on Iran. The Asian giant is walking a tightrope in criticizing the US and Israeli military operation. But it offers nothing more than statements of support for its ally, the regime of the ayatollahs.

In contrast, regarding the economic effects of the war, Beijing has been much more forceful. It demanded the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and warned that the closure of this vital passage for maritime oil traffic harms global trade. Wang Yi, the head of Chinese diplomacy, made his country's position clear, stating that "this war should never have happened" and calling for a ceasefire to prevent the conflict from escalating. He did so on March 9th at the only press conference he holds each year, which serves to define China's diplomatic position on the international stage.

The chaos unleashed by Donald Trump, which is pushing the world into an economic crisis, allows Xi Jinping to argue that China is an example of stability and not a threat to the world, in contrast to the US. However, the good reputation that Beijing boasts does not prevent it from acknowledging that the war is not good news for them.

Iran is a strategic partner for the People's Republic of China because it has allowed China to expand its presence in the Middle East. It is also a major oil supplier: Beijing buys 80% of Iran's crude oil exports at a reduced price due to sanctions imposed by Western countries. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz particularly affects Iran, as around 45% of China's oil imports pass through this waterway. And, although China has significant oil reserves, the crisis will also impact its economy.

The price of the shopping basket

From Beijing, Yun, an IT specialist, complains that gasoline prices rose earlier this week and that the war will cause a general price increase. She believes the war is related to Washington's attempt to maintain the value of the dollar and control natural resources. And, of course, she defends China's pacifist stance. She asserts that The Chinese are especially concerned about the price of the shopping basket And that's what they talk about.

However, the war against Iran isn't as prominent in China as it is in Western societies. When all Chinese television channels connect with Channel 1 at 7 p.m. to broadcast the main news program, Xinwen lianbo, international news doesn't appear until the end and is brief. The newscast always begins by explaining Xi Jinping's activities and speeches.

What stands out in the Chinese media is China's position advocating for diplomacy. Chinese commentators on various programs emphasize the decline of the United States and its imperialist attitude. The press, all state-run, maintains the same critical stance toward the United States. On social media, also controlled by censorship, there was initially support for Iran and criticism of Donald Trump, but interest has waned.

China's position, which defends territorial integrity and international law and calls the war against Iran illegal, contrasts sharply with its silence on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It has never condemned it, and even Chinese media continue to refer to a Russian "special military operation," never to an invasion or war.

The struggle for hegemony

A protracted war in Iran would weaken the United States, especially its influence in Asia, where South Korea and Japan may fear a reduction in its commitment to their security. Pentagon moves like those this week, which has transferred anti-aircraft defenses from South Korea to the Middle East, This reinforces that fear. It would also cause arms sales to its Asian allies, such as Taiwan, to slow down due to the need for war supplies. In the long term, the situation could benefit China, as Iran may become more dependent on its economic aid, and Xi himself could strengthen his position in Asia.

Behind the war against Iran lies a geostrategic power struggle. The United States has recently attacked Venezuela and Iran and is negotiating a change in Cuba. All three are preferred partners of China. Venezuela and Iran are two oil suppliers that, moreover, used the Chinese currency (the yuan), not the dollar, for trade. With Venezuela, and if Cuba is added, Washington is demonstrating its strength to make it clear that it does not want to lose its hegemony in Latin America. Likewise, the military operation against Iran also sends the message that the Middle East will remain an area of ​​US influence through Israel.

In contrast, China is emerging as a leader of multilateralism, of the international order, and a leader of the Global South. But the conflict also exposes its weaknesses. Beijing can offer little beyond its diplomatic support for a ceasefire and economic aid for reconstruction. The current Chinese army is not ready to compete with that of the United States, much less far from its borders.

Trade is China's diplomatic weapon. And, above all, what governs Beijing's behavior is pragmatism. Iran is a strategic ally that has allowed it to obtain cheap oil. But the other actor in the region, Israel, is also a good partner with whom it has significant trade relations. That is why, although it also condemned the attacks on Gaza and always defended the creation of a Palestinian state, it did not sever relations with Tel Aviv in the face of the genocide.